• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

General political chat

21stamps

Well-Known Member
It was a joke in my opinion
Mine too. Did you see the excerpt I quoted?
I mean, People commit crimes anyway, so why even try to prevent them?

People read things and see links attached, so take it as a full story. Meanwhile, much is being left out of the story.. and once again we’re seeing confusion on what qualifies for refugee status.
 

EricsBiscuit

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Stossel is great, as usual.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
Everyone (on the right) seems to be really clinging to what a few of the dems in power did in 2006 or even 2013. Again, I don't think that because they voted for x back then means they now have to give $5.7 billion. I can't speak for those in power, but I can say that based on what I've seen, #1 the $5.7 billion is just a start, #2 the money can be used more effectively elsewhere, #3 there is no crisis.

To my " I know you are but what am I" response, I was pointing out that we could go all day with those prompts. The "why did they care then but not now" card can be pulled out all the time. See deficit......


So what the democrats said in 2013 and 2014 should be discarded and not be a factor.

Maybe the left needs to stop referring to what Trump said when he came down the elevator.

There is a crisis if you live in a border state but those border state problems are spilling into many states. By the time some people wake up it may be too late.

Since when are democrats concerned about 5 Billion? To our budget is like a nickel to $100.

I guess the democrats trip to Puerto Rico last weekend on tax payer's dime is good use of money. Of course on the Puerto Rico trip there were only 3.7 lobbyists present for every congress member. Wait until the spending for all of those lobbyist influence gets into the system. Crony capitalism at its best.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Everyone (on the right) seems to be really clinging to what a few of the dems in power did in 2006 or even 2013.
I'm sorry, but I think that is disingenuous.

It wasn't a "few dems in power". We are talking senator and senator and representative after representative, including the last democratic President of the US. "We must secure our borders" has never been a controversial mainstream topic.

That is the problem now. We have people like Pelosi stating such far-far-left rhetoric like that a "wall is immoral", that illegal immigration isn't really that big of a deal, and refusing to negotiate on it at all.

If this were not Trump, this never would have been an issue - they would have accepted the $2.5M deal before the shutdown even occurred. But they are so desperate to fulfill their promise to block anything and everything that has to do with Trump. They have become no better than the republicans who tried to do the same thing to Obama. And they have lost the high ground that they once had on being obstructionist versus bipartisan.

Basically, this is the new politics, and I guess we have to get used to it because no matter who is in power in the future, it is clear that representatives all across the political spectrum are now willing to sacrifice their actual beliefs just to be seen as opposing the opposite side.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
Mine too. Did you see the excerpt I quoted?
I mean, People commit crimes anyway, so why even try to prevent them?

People read things and see links attached, so take it as a full story. Meanwhile, much is being left out of the story.. and once again we’re seeing confusion on what qualifies for refugee status.

It is mind boggling that people think this is journalism. It was a reporter spewing an opinionated narrative.

Reporter was not intellectually curious enough to do basic research and appears to have parroted Daily Cos and other liberal web sites exclusively.

If I broke the law and did show up for my court date I woud be arrested. Seems to be a look the other way enforcement of our laws when it comes to illegal immigrants.
 

aw14

Well-Known Member
A great example of the echo chamber of the left.

CNN legal analyst Aveva Martin accused Sirius and Fox Nation host David Webb of "white privilege" in a recent segment.

The only problem David Webb is a black conservative.
He told her she should prepare better from now on. Too funny.
I was just posting this same thing. It made me laugh out loud.

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/cnn-legal-analyst-areva-martin-accuses-david-webb-of-white-privilege-before-learning-hes-black
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
It is mind boggling that people think this is journalism. It was a reporter spewing an opinionated narrative.
It isn't a report and doesn't pretend to be; it's an opinion piece in the website's blog subsection. Far from describing it as objective journalism, kong acknowledged from the outset that others may respond differently to the argument: "Whether you agree with or not I felt it was well laid out."
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
It isn't a report and doesn't pretend to be; it's an opinion piece in the website's blog subsection. Far from describing it as objective journalism, kong acknowledged from the outset that others may respond differently to the argument: "Whether you agree with or not I felt it was well laid out."

Even opinion pieces should be fact based. Of course you would think it was well laid out. Exactly what I would expect from you.

You must be excited that the parliament voted against the will of the people in the UK today. Let's don't let the people get in the way of our global agenda.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Of course you would think it was well laid out. Exactly what I would expect from you.
I was quoting kong--hence the quotation marks. Your expectations of me have led to a knee-jerk assumption.

You must be excited that the parliament voted against the will of the people in the UK today. Let's don't let the people get in the way of our global agenda.
Please do a little reading. The deal was opposed not only by remainers, but by a large number of Brexiteers (including Boris Johnson) who believe it doesn't go far enough in severing the UK from the EU. I am not excited at all--there is no good alternative on the table.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member

Black conservative are for the most part unseen and unheard on most networks. It is sad that black conservatives basically only have a voice on Fox.

Nothing more threatening to the left than a conservative black or an attractive conservative smart women. Many examples of their vilification.

Of course the left are the enlightened and cosmopolitan ones. Mustn't forget that.
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
This article failed to mention the republicans have requested additional money for technology equipment to detect drugs at points of entry.

Focused on asylum seekers for the most part as if they are the only ones coming across our border. Why that approach? Agenda.

Economic hardship does not qualify for asylum. Did this reporter know that?

Does this reporter know that the president has more info than this reporter to determine if it is a crisis. Wonder why this reporter didn't mention in 2014 the WaPO, Huffington Post, Cnn, ABC news referred to the crisis on the border. Oh forgot Obama was president and if he said it was a crisis they fell in line.

Citing statistics from various years shows this reporter in not aware of the fluid situation on our border.

Reporter did not bother to even talk to the experts-the Border Patrol about a wall. Why didn't the reporter talk to Mark Morgan, Obama's Border Chief, about his absolute conviction we need a border wall.

This article was pathetic and shows a reporter that did not do the required homework, ignored important information, and wanted those that read it to believe the reporter's limited and bias perspective. It was a joke in my opinion.
You are riled up on this one.

So this person’s opinion is pathetic, had an agenda, and is a joke? That’s pretty strong. It’s ok to disagree with the opinion, as I stated some would, but that’s an extreme reaction.

Your rebuttal to those facts presented are: Trump knows more, opinion can’t be formed without talking to one person in border control, and Asylum seeking rules?

I’ll post more later as to why I agree with a lot that’s in that article and how I formed my opinion, but I don’t think that author had an agenda other than presenting their view...
 

OneofThree

Well-Known Member
Last edited:

draybook

Well-Known Member
Everyone (on the right) seems to be really clinging to what a few of the dems in power did in 2006 or even 2013. Again, I don't think that because they voted for x back then means they now have to give $5.7 billion. I can't speak for those in power, but I can say that based on what I've seen, #1 the $5.7 billion is just a start, #2 the money can be used more effectively elsewhere, #3 there is no crisis.

To my " I know you are but what am I" response, I was pointing out that we could go all day with those prompts. The "why did they care then but not now" card can be pulled out all the time. See deficit......

Kind of like the left being obsessed with Trump's crude statement made 12 years before entering politics? Or them bringing up his statement about a president's role in a government shutdown years before he ran for office? Time jumping isn't a right or left thing exclusively.
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry, but I think that is disingenuous.

It wasn't a "few dems in power". We are talking senator and senator and representative after representative, including the last democratic President of the US. "We must secure our borders" has never been a controversial mainstream topic.

That is the problem now. We have people like Pelosi stating such far-far-left rhetoric like that a "wall is immoral", that illegal immigration isn't really that big of a deal, and refusing to negotiate on it at all.

If this were not Trump, this never would have been an issue - they would have accepted the $2.5M deal before the shutdown even occurred. But they are so desperate to fulfill their promise to block anything and everything that has to do with Trump. They have become no better than the republicans who tried to do the same thing to Obama. And they have lost the high ground that they once had on being obstructionist versus bipartisan.

Basically, this is the new politics, and I guess we have to get used to it because no matter who is in power in the future, it is clear that representatives all across the political spectrum are now willing to sacrifice their actual beliefs just to be seen as opposing the opposite side.
Perhaps my language wasn’t representative in which dems voted for what in 2006 or 2013. I’ve stated before that they should clarify the differences if there are any between what happened then vs now. I don’t think they are anti border security. I don’t believe that since they voted for fencing in 2006 that now they must naturally vote for a wall in 2019.

But I agree that there is a lot of obstructionist attitudes that seemed to develop among the republicans during Obama and now we are seeing it from the left. It’s terrible and will probably get worse until we get back to the middle. But step #1 is realizing that there are differing opinions to solving a problem and respecting those (not a point at you directly).

And I concede your point that this is made worse by the Trump dynamic. Trump has to deliver this wall to his base, and the dems have to stop it to appease theirs. It’s a no win foe anyone in the middle.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Nothing like another hostule invasion to further galvanize support for the wall. Wonder whose organizing and funding it this time.
Yeah, that was my first thought, too.

This is only a personal anecdote, but over the holidays I was part of several discussions at various gatherings about the first caravan. Even people who actively hate Trump, aren't for the wall, who can't even say his name without looking like they are going to wretch, down to a person, said some variation of "Oh, but that caravan? Nah, that's not cool. We gotta do something about that. That's not right."

I think most people who are not intellectually dishonest do understand that, even if these people start off with a "legitimate" group and reason for coming, that they just pick up more and more people along the way who don't have the same excuses. They saw how the actual people seeking refuge took it when it was offered in Mexico (most of the original several thousand). They watched the media fawn and broadcast all that video of trains and trains of large groups among the "migrants" who were able-bodied young men with designer-branded clothes all rushing at the stops to find the massive charging stations for everyone's smartphones.

I wonder how the media is going to cover this one. Did they learn their lesson? The new polls out show that, out of those polled, a majority of people are blaming Trump for the shutdown, but when you read down the other questions, you see that people who are actually concerned about immigration has increased and actual opposition to "the wall" has decreased since the last round of "look at this mob of people heading to the US" media blitz.
 
Top Bottom